Feat: Display unread marker for messages that were received while offline by chrispader · Pull Request #49480 · Expensify/App

chrispader · 2024-09-19T17:02:41Z

Details

Fixed Issues

$ #44007
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Log into Expensify with two accounts on web + a different device or incognito tab.
Open a 1:1 conversation between the two accounts
Disable the internet connection of the first Expensify session in the DevTools (Network -> Throttling -> Offline)
Send messages from the second account to the first account
Enable internet again in the first session (Network -> Throttling -> No throttling)
There should be a "New" (unread messages) marker above the first message that was sent while the user was offline

Offline tests

The description in "Tests" is already covering offline behaviour.

QA Steps

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Same as in Tests.

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2024-09-21.at.20.49.28.mov

MacOS: Desktop

MacOS Chrome (Arc) screen recording attached.

…layed

melvin-bot · 2024-09-21T18:52:14Z

@brunovjk Please copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

chrispader · 2024-09-21T18:58:45Z

This is ready for review! :)

cc @brunovjk @alexpensify

brunovjk · 2024-09-21T19:54:37Z

@roryabraham @chrispader Do you think we should work on the marker dismissal here? I can only dismiss if I enter another conversation and come back:

Screen.Recording.2024-09-21.at.16.45.52.mov

brunovjk · 2024-09-21T20:35:43Z

@roryabraham Can you confirm something please? Should this new feat of ours only work on the web or other platforms as well? Thank you.

chrispader · 2024-09-23T11:17:43Z

@roryabraham @chrispader Do you think we should work on the marker dismissal here? I can only dismiss if I enter another conversation and come back:

If so, i think this should be handled in a separate issue. The same behavior is the case for receiving messages in a report when it's not active. (also the case on main).

Screen.Recording.2024-09-23.at.12.52.33.mov

brunovjk · 2024-09-23T15:25:31Z

Do you think we should work on the marker dismissal here? I can only dismiss if I enter another conversation and come back:

If so, i think this should be handled in a separate issue.

I understand, I also agree that taking this to another issue would be more appropriate.

@chrispader I'm having problems with the marker, I'm "playing around" with two conversations and the behavior is still not consistent in my tests:

Screen.Recording.2024-09-23.at.12.19.21.mov

I'll come back here tomorrow and test more, I'll clean everything up here, maybe it's something with my local. But, in your tests, did everything work correctly? Thank you.

chrispader · 2024-09-24T10:21:31Z

@chrispader I'm having problems with the marker, I'm "playing around" with two conversations and the behavior is still not consistent in my tests:

I'll come back here tomorrow and test more, I'll clean everything up here, maybe it's something with my local. But, in your tests, did everything work correctly? Thank you.

One thing that makes me wonder: Why did the right user receive the message from the left one before throttling was disabled (before it went back online)? That's weird.

I can see that the users own messages are als recognized as "new messages". This shouldn't happen. I'm going to look into that!

Other than that, i had no problems with the unread marker while testing

brunovjk · 2024-09-25T16:04:30Z

Reviewer Checklist

I have verified the author checklist is complete (all boxes are checked off).
I verified the correct issue is linked in the ### Fixed Issues section above
I verified testing steps are clear and they cover the changes made in this PR
- I verified the steps for local testing are in the Tests section
- I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the QA steps section
- I verified the steps cover any possible failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
- I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
I checked that screenshots or videos are included for tests on all platforms
I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
- Android: Native
- Android: mWeb Chrome
- iOS: Native
- iOS: mWeb Safari
- MacOS: Chrome / Safari
- MacOS: Desktop
If there are any errors in the console that are unrelated to this PR, I either fixed them (preferred) or linked to where I reported them in Slack
I verified proper code patterns were followed (see Reviewing the code)
- I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick).
- I verified that the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
- I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
- I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
- I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
- I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
- I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
- I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
- I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
I verified that this PR follows the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
I verified other components that can be impacted by these changes have been tested, and I retested again (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar have been tested & I retested again)
I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.js or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
If a new component is created I verified that:
- A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
- All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
- The file is named correctly
- The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
- The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
- For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
- Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
- All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
- The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
If any new file was added I verified that:
- The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
- A similar style doesn't already exist
- The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG)
If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
- I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
- I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.
I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

49480_android_native.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

49480_android_web.mov

iOS: Native

49480_ios_native.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

49480_web_chorme.mov

MacOS: Desktop

49480_web_desktop.mov

brunovjk · 2024-09-25T16:08:44Z

@chrispader Indeed, sorry, ignore that report, it was an issue with my local. I tested the changes in all platforms, it seems fine so far. Did you have a chance to check "I can see that the users own messages are als recognized as "new messages". This shouldn't happen. I'm going to look into that!"? Thank you.

chrispader · 2024-09-26T14:40:12Z

Did you have a chance to check "I can see that the users own messages are als recognized as "new messages". This shouldn't happen. I'm going to look into that!"? Thank you.

Just fixed the issue 👍

brunovjk

I retested it and it looks good to me:

Screen.Recording.2024-09-26.at.15.14.09.mov

@chrispader Do you know why the "Performance Tests error" in the PR? Thanks.

chrispader · 2024-09-26T19:24:30Z

@chrispader Do you know why the "Performance Tests error" in the PR? Thanks.

No idea tbh :/ I don't think it's actually related to the changes. Had the same issue with a few other PRs

roryabraham · 2024-09-26T21:05:22Z

Do you think we should work on the marker dismissal here?

I don't think we should introduce this feature at this time.

roryabraham · 2024-09-26T21:07:01Z

Should this new feat of ours only work on the web or other platforms as well?

I don't see any reason why this would be web-only. So all platforms 🙂

tylerkaraszewski · 2024-09-30T22:44:58Z

I've approved the PR but the performance tests are failing.

chrispader · 2024-10-23T15:18:15Z

Solution

This logic has no control of whether the message has (actually) been created/sent while the sender was offline. Only messages received while the own device was offline will be "marked as unread" (green line).

Therefore, we have two options on how to handle this in the UI.

Approach 1

Stick with the current implementation and only mark messages as unread, that have been received while the current user was offline. In case both users are offline while sending message, the user who is back online first will not see the "urnead marker".

Approach 2

Also mark messages as unread, that have been created while the sender was offline. For this, we will need to add an additional prop like createdWhileOfflineAt or wasCreatedWhileOffline to keep track of whether the message was created in an offline state.

I don't favor this approach though, since this would also mean, that all (online) users will receive "unread markers" (green lines) if some other user sends a message while offline. This might be very disturbing in groups especially.

Curious about your thoughts cc @brunovjk @tylerkaraszewski

brunovjk · 2024-10-23T19:17:54Z

Curious about your thoughts cc @brunovjk @tylerkaraszewski

Thanks for the detailed explanation, @chrispader. Apologies for any unnecessary extra work on this. I believe this is primarily an edge case and not reflective of typical user behavior, though I can't confirm that definitively (we'd need @tylerkaraszewski's input on that). From my perspective, we can proceed as is to avoid regressions.

brunovjk

Overall, the changes seem solid and well thought out. I agree with proceeding, in my tests everything works well:

Android: Native

49480_android_native.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

49480_android_web.mov

iOS: Native

49480_ios_native.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

49480_ios_web.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

49480_web_chrome.mov

MacOS: Desktop

49480_web_desktop.mov

tylerkaraszewski · 2024-10-28T21:14:51Z

I've read the scenario above and particularly point 9 is of interest:

User A will receive a message from User B with created timestamp 8. User A will not see the green line, because User A was already back online at 8.

This says that user A receives a message while online and thus the green line is not updated.

I think that's fine, I don't think user A needs to care if user B was online or not when they initially tried to send it. When the message is actually able to be sent, user A is online, and the message arrives immediately.

I think that's fine. That lets us go with the current solution, correct?

chrispader · 2024-10-29T08:21:19Z

This says that user A receives a message while online and thus the green line is not updated.

Correct, technically the message is received while already back online. (Only) if both devices come back online at the same time, it might be perceived as weird, but i suppose no user will ever use two devices at the same time and text himself.

I think that's fine. That lets us go with the current solution, correct?

Yes, that sounds good!

brunovjk · 2024-10-29T11:19:32Z

Great, we just need to resolve the conflicts to merge? Thanks.

chrispader · 2024-10-29T14:38:36Z

Resolved conflicts!

tylerkaraszewski · 2024-10-29T15:43:07Z

Can we address the failing unit test?

brunovjk · 2024-10-29T20:13:58Z

I'm not sure what is causing, if is indeed our PR, I will investigate and back here if I find something

chrispader · 2024-10-29T22:35:32Z

I'm not sure what is causing, if is indeed our PR, I will investigate and back here if I find something

Sorry my bad, while restructuring the new checks in the changes from main, i unintentionally inverted the condition for one of the early-returns in the shouldDisplayNewMarker check.

Tests should now succeed, @brunovjk @tylerkaraszewski

brunovjk · 2024-10-30T11:39:50Z

Retesting

chrispader · 2024-10-30T11:49:37Z

Just tested it and still works on my machine :)

brunovjk · 2024-10-30T13:12:31Z

Indeed, everything looks very good to me:

Screen.Recording.2024-10-30.at.10.06.35.mov

@tylerkaraszewski all yours.

OSBotify · 2024-10-31T21:39:50Z

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

github-actions · 2024-11-04T14:38:19Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/tylerkaraszewski in version: 9.0.57-0 🚀

platform	result
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖🔄 android HybridApp 🤖🔄	success ✅
🍎🔄 iOS HybridApp 🍎🔄	success ✅

github-actions · 2024-11-06T00:01:52Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/luacmartins in version: 9.0.57-10 🚀

platform	result
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖🔄 android HybridApp 🤖🔄	skipped 🚫
🍎🔄 iOS HybridApp 🍎🔄	skipped 🚫

jjcoffee · 2025-02-18T08:28:31Z


+function wasActionCreatedWhileOffline(action: ReportAction, isOffline: boolean, lastOfflineAt: Date | undefined, lastOnlineAt: Date | undefined, locale: Locale): boolean {
+    // The user was never online.
+    if (!lastOnlineAt) {


Coming from #55990. We missed a case here, where if you received a message from a chat that's not open, then go offline and open that report, the new message marker won't show. This is because lastOnlineAt will be undefined here as it's stored in component state. More details.

rayane-d · 2025-02-26T20:17:06Z

+    const wasMessageReceivedWhileOffline = useCallback(
+        (message: OnyxTypes.ReportAction) =>
+            !ReportActionsUtils.wasActionTakenByCurrentUser(message) &&
+            ReportActionsUtils.wasActionCreatedWhileOffline(message, isOffline, lastOfflineAt.current, lastOnlineAt.current, preferredLocale),


Coming from #55560, We missed a case here, when we get an optimistic message from Concierge offline, we fixed it by returning false if the message is optimistic
Proposal: #55560 (comment)
PR: #56628

feat: unread marker for messages while offline

c7d3751

chrispader mentioned this pull request Sep 19, 2024

[HOLD for payment 2024-11-13] [$250] Web - Messages - Unread marker is not displayed after the messages are received #44007

Closed

6 tasks

chrispader and others added 2 commits September 19, 2024 19:03

Merge branch 'Expensify:main' into @chrispader/unread-marker-not-disp…

64644ac

…layed

Merge branch 'main' into @chrispader/unread-marker-not-displayed

fcc738c

chrispader changed the title ~~[WIP] Feat: Display urnead marker for messages that were received while offline~~ Feat: Display unread marker for messages that were received while offline Sep 21, 2024

chrispader marked this pull request as ready for review September 21, 2024 18:52

chrispader requested a review from a team as a code owner September 21, 2024 18:52

melvin-bot Bot requested a review from brunovjk September 21, 2024 18:52

melvin-bot Bot removed the request for review from a team September 21, 2024 18:52

chrispader added 2 commits September 21, 2024 20:55

add comments

6d4ff5a

add comment and fix logic

077ba40

chrispader added 2 commits September 26, 2024 16:34

Merge branch 'main' into @chrispader/unread-marker-not-displayed

51bd4c2

fix: don't show unread marker for own messages

3c4ad02

brunovjk approved these changes Sep 26, 2024

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot Bot requested a review from tylerkaraszewski September 26, 2024 18:41

tylerkaraszewski previously approved these changes Sep 30, 2024

View reviewed changes

Merge branch 'main' into @chrispader/unread-marker-not-displayed

2af086d

chrispader requested a review from brunovjk October 23, 2024 16:43

brunovjk approved these changes Oct 23, 2024

View reviewed changes

chrispader changed the title ~~[HOLD] Feat: Display unread marker for messages that were received while offline~~ Feat: Display unread marker for messages that were received while offline Oct 24, 2024

Merge branch 'main' into @chrispader/unread-marker-not-displayed

9c4344c

tylerkaraszewski previously approved these changes Oct 29, 2024

View reviewed changes

fix: wrong condition in early return

d0f6d94

chrispader dismissed tylerkaraszewski’s stale review via d0f6d94 October 29, 2024 22:34

tylerkaraszewski approved these changes Oct 31, 2024

View reviewed changes

tylerkaraszewski merged commit 5c2ecb1 into Expensify:main Oct 31, 2024

github-actions Bot mentioned this pull request Nov 4, 2024

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2024-11-04 #51953

Closed

63 tasks

bernhardoj mentioned this pull request Jan 22, 2025

[Due for payment 2025-03-05] [$250] Track expense - Wrong position of the "New Message" line when track expense offline #55560

Closed

8 tasks

jjcoffee mentioned this pull request Feb 4, 2025

[Due for payment 2025-02-19] [$250] Chat - New message marker is not displayed when the chat opened offline #55990

Closed

8 tasks

jjcoffee reviewed Feb 18, 2025

View reviewed changes

rayane-d reviewed Feb 26, 2025

View reviewed changes

Uh oh!

Conversation

chrispader commented Sep 19, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Details

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Sep 21, 2024

Uh oh!

chrispader commented Sep 21, 2024

Uh oh!

brunovjk commented Sep 21, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

brunovjk commented Sep 21, 2024

Uh oh!

chrispader commented Sep 23, 2024

Uh oh!

brunovjk commented Sep 23, 2024

Uh oh!

chrispader commented Sep 24, 2024

Uh oh!

brunovjk commented Sep 25, 2024

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

brunovjk commented Sep 25, 2024

Uh oh!

chrispader commented Sep 26, 2024

Uh oh!

brunovjk left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

chrispader commented Sep 26, 2024

Uh oh!

roryabraham commented Sep 26, 2024

Uh oh!

roryabraham commented Sep 26, 2024

Uh oh!

tylerkaraszewski commented Sep 30, 2024

Uh oh!

chrispader commented Oct 23, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Solution

Approach 1

Approach 2

Uh oh!

brunovjk commented Oct 23, 2024

Uh oh!

brunovjk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

tylerkaraszewski commented Oct 28, 2024

Uh oh!

chrispader commented Oct 29, 2024

Uh oh!

brunovjk commented Oct 29, 2024

Uh oh!

chrispader commented Oct 29, 2024

Uh oh!

tylerkaraszewski commented Oct 29, 2024

Uh oh!

brunovjk commented Oct 29, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

chrispader commented Oct 29, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

brunovjk commented Oct 30, 2024

Uh oh!

chrispader commented Oct 30, 2024

Uh oh!

brunovjk commented Oct 30, 2024

Uh oh!

chrispader commented Sep 19, 2024 •

edited

Loading

brunovjk commented Sep 21, 2024 •

edited

Loading

brunovjk left a comment •

edited

Loading

chrispader commented Oct 23, 2024 •

edited

Loading

brunovjk commented Oct 29, 2024 •

edited

Loading

chrispader commented Oct 29, 2024 •

edited

Loading